User talk:InternetArchiveBot

Add topic
Active discussions
InternetArchiveBot
Archive
Archives

Connect with the developers and other usersEdit

Telegram IRC (irc.libera.chat #iabot)

Operation statusEdit

For the most up to date information see the run pages

  • 🟢 InternetArchiveBot is currently running on 100+ Wikimedia wikis
  • 🔴 Bot is approved but disabled indefinitely pending software improvements on Arabic Wikipedia (ar), Bulgarian Wikipedia (bg), German Wikipedia (de), Finnish Wikipedia (fi), French Wikipedia (fr), Hebrew Wikipedia (he), MediaWiki.org, Polish Wikipedia (pl), Portuguese Wikipedia (pt), and Rusyn Wikipedia (rue).
  • 🔴 Bot is blocked pending our application for reapproval on Japanese Wikipedia (ja)
  • 🔴 Bot is blocked pending software improvements on Afrikaans Wikipedia (af), Welsh Wikipedia (cy) and Persian Wikipedia (fa)

Last updated: 18:56, 1 July 2022 (UTC)


SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 7 days.


Thanks for the wonderful work you have doneEdit

Wow 🙏😍😍 Lethulake (talk) 05:19, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

@Lethulake: you are so very welcome. :-) —CYBERPOWER (Chat) 18:41, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

Citation templates configuration page for etwikiEdit

Hi Cyberpower678, can I get the access to the templates configuration page? You already gave the access to user Pikne (https://et.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vikipeedia_arutelu:Saatkond/Arhiiv_7) and he has configured the settings (which is well). I would just like to double check. Kaniivel (talk) 21:06, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

Kaniivel, please read InternetArchiveBot/Documentation/Configuring citation maps and let us know when you have done so. Harej (talk) 18:51, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
Harej, I have read the page that you indicated. Kaniivel (talk) 10:28, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
@Kaniivel: do you have any questions? Is there anything you don't understand about the document? —CYBERPOWER (Chat) 07:12, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
Not everything is 100% clear, but think I can just test things as I go. This is what I usually do with similar manuals in my daily job as a software developer. Kaniivel (talk) 16:23, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
I don't think the model of testing as you go is a particularly good one here, as changes you make are applied to production. It's probably better to ask if you are uncertain about any changes you are trying to make. I have gone ahead and granted you access to configuration page on etwiki. Please remember that a mistake can have adverse consequences on IABot for etwiki. Please check to make sure you have access to the page and let me know if you have any issues or questions.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 18:58, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
@Kaniivel: Ping for above response.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 19:03, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
  This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Harej (talk) 18:39, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

permanent dead link en:Ariane 6Edit

The Bot marked a link as permanent dead, but the link is still working. Barny22 (talk) 17:42, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

Pinging user GreenC as this is a result of his bot setting this URL to a permadead state. —CYBERPOWER (Chat) 07:18, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
Caused by a known bug now fixed. This particular URL was fixed on July 22nd: [1] -- GreenC (talk) 18:29, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
  This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Harej (talk) 18:39, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Reference do Internetového archivuEdit

Dobrý den, zprvu se omlouvám, že píši česky, bohužel neumím anglicky. Na české Wikipedii jsem narazil na tyto dvě editace bota: wikipedia:cs:Speciální:Rozdíl/21534531 a wikipedia:cs:Speciální:Rozdíl/21534536. Šlo o reference přímo do Internetového archivu, tedy nebylo vhodné, aby je bot opravoval (periodikum = Wayback Machine, vydavatel = Internet Archive, datum vydání = datum archivace v Internetovém archivu). Marek Genius (talk) 16:59, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

@Marek Genius: I don't see a problem with this edit. The bot is enforcing the proper usage of the template by moving the archive URL to the correct spot on the template.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 13:11, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
@Cyberpower678: Dobrý den. Jde o to, že tyto reference citovaly přímo Internet Archive, nikoliv původní dokument. Šablona tedy měla následující podobu:
  • {{Citace elektronického periodika | titul = "nějaký název" | periodikum = Wayback Machine | odkaz_na_periodikum = Wayback Machine | vydavatel = Internet Archive | odkaz_na_vydavatele = Internet Archive | url = https://web.archive.org/web/"nějaké datum"/"nějaké URL" | datum_vydání = "nějaké datum archivace pomocí Internet Archive"}}</nowiki>
Kdežto reference na původní dokument by vypadala takto:
  • {{Citace elektronického periodika | titul = "nějaký název" | periodikum = "název časopisu, nikoliv Wayback Machine" | odkaz_na_periodikum = "název časopisu" | vydavatel = "vydavatel časopisu, nikoliv Internet Archive" | odkaz_na_vydavatele = "vydavatel časopisu" | url = "nějaké URL" | datum_vydání = "datum vydání časopisu, nikoliv datum archivace"}}.
Podobné problémy jsem objevil také na stránce wikipedia:cs:Speciální:Rozdíl/21554492, wikipedia:cs:Speciální:Rozdíl/21549774, wikipedia:cs:Speciální:Rozdíl/21549765 nebo wikipedia:cs:Speciální:Rozdíl/21581216. Marek Genius (talk) 23:57, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
Prostě by asi měla existovat nějaká výjimka pro případy, kdy parametr periodikum nebo parametr vydavatel je vyplněno jako Wayback Machine nebo Internet Archive. Marek Genius (talk) 06:04, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
@Marek Genius: Some points of information, the Wayback Machine is not a periodical and Internet Archive is not a publisher of said periodicals. You need to be citing the original name of the periodical and its original publisher. The Wayback Machine is only a repository of past copies of websites. If the original URL is dead, it should still be cited. IABot is simply enforcing that. Unfortunately, I still don't see any reason to add an exception for this.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 16:08, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
@Cyberpower678: Warning, You changes violates US law (more precisely, plagiarism, [good] name of the author of the original work). Dušan Kreheľ (talk) 08:13, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
No, it doesn't. Please don't make unqualified remarks. —CYBERPOWER (Chat) 08:40, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
@Cyberpower678: I looked at the errors in more detail. It's not your fault. Sorry. Dušan Kreheľ (talk) 15:20, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Misfunction causing broken referencesEdit

Tracked in Phabricator:
task T309448

I noticed that in this edit, the bot has broken the reference by adding the Wayback template directly after the URL, when it should have done it like this. There are other examples as well: 1, 2, 3, 4. Could you fix the bot so it doesn't repeat this error, and if possible also fix the existing broken references that the bot has caused? Thanks, TommiWalle (talk) 21:37, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

The bot has continued to make problematic edits: [2][3][4][5]. I have disabled the bot in fiwiki until this problem is resolved. --TommiWalle (talk) 17:26, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
TommiWalle, thank you for your report. We are tracking the issue on Phabricator; it seems to affect multiple wikis. Once this is resolved we can look into doing more tests on Finnish Wikipedia. Harej (talk) 18:09, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
  This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. —CYBERPOWER (Chat) 13:46, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

re-block on fawikiEdit

Hi. I blocked this bot on Persian Wikipedia because the parameter issues are still present. see this thread for ongoing discussions and this diff for example. Jeeputer (talk) 12:48, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

@Jeeputer: The block on fawiki was completely unnecessary as another user had already shut it off 10 hours before. In general, blocking the bot is not necessary as it is better to turn it off by following the instructions on the user page. I request the bot be unblocked. —CYBERPOWER (Chat) 12:58, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
@Jeeputer: Making sure you saw this. Can you please unblock the bot as it is already disabled?—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 14:03, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
  This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. —CYBERPOWER (Chat) 08:41, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

url-status=unfitEdit

Recently IABot started to use the value "unfit" for the url-status parameter on nlwiki (named 'dodeurl' locally), but the citation templates have not been adapted for this change, causing dead links to be shown instead of archived ones. Was there an announcement to the community about this change? If so, when and where? If not, please don't use "unfit" until we got the chance to adapt our templates. Also, where are the possible url-status values documented? bdijkstra (talk) 12:51, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

@Bdijkstra: Please have a look at nl:Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration which, according to it, supports that value. It's supposed tell the template to hide the original URL and only render the archive URL to the readers. If it's not doing that, you will need to fix the module to support that value, or remove the value, as well as "usurped" and "bot: unknown" from the configuration to keep the bot from using them. The bot adapts it's behavior based on what's present in the module configuration. —CYBERPOWER (Chat) 14:10, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
The Dutch implementation isn't based on Module:Citation, but fixed them anyway. Mbch331 (talk) 14:24, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
Where is it documented what these values mean? bdijkstra (talk) 14:57, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
@Bdijkstra: Please see en:Template:Cite_web#URL since the module was imported from enwiki. —CYBERPOWER (Chat) 15:00, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
I'm sorry, I should have asked my question more clearly, I meant to ask it in the context of the behaviour of IABot. In other words: does IABot distinguish between 'dead', 'usurped for the purposes of spam or advertising' and 'otherwise unsuitable'? bdijkstra (talk) 15:52, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
@Bdijkstra: Since they are functionally different, the answer is yes. Keywords like 'dead', 'yes', 'y', 'true', 'ja' are treated as a dead, while keywords like 'live','no','n',etc... treats the original URL as alive. Keywords like 'unfit', 'usurped', 'bot: unknown' treats the original URL with uncertainty, but assumed dead. It also tells the bot the original URL is hidden from view and should remain that way. Does this help? —CYBERPOWER (Chat) 18:29, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
Not really. I'm (still) talking about IABot writing template parameters to a page. I'd like to know how it chooses a value like 'dead' or 'unfit'. I understand it picks them from the CS1 module, but how does it decide the meaning of the options (what if we add a Dutch translation of 'unfit') and why it suddenly started using 'unfit' instead of 'ja'. bdijkstra (talk) 17:25, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
@Bdijstra: IABot generally uses the dead value. It will use unfit, or bot: unknown in cases where the archive URL was present in the URL field and the bot is moving it to the correct archive URL field. —CYBERPOWER (Chat) 17:27, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
Thanks, that answers my question. bdijkstra (talk) 11:37, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
  This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Harej (talk) 14:49, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

The problem changeEdit

This change hr:Special:Diff/5999396 is the problem change because en:WP:NOTDATABASE. The item line with URI would be removed. Dušan Kreheľ (talk) 18:35, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Dušan Kreheľ, thank you for your report. I am not sure what you mean. It is true Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate database, but how is that relevant to the edit the bot made? Harej (talk) 18:48, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
@Harej: As English page variant: The dead link in the section Nitra#External_links are deleted, but Your bot does archiving. Dušan Kreheľ (talk) 19:32, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
The bot runs on a policy of making non-destructive edits. Deleting URLs is a destructive action. It should be left to the human to decide whether or not it should be deleted. Until that time, the bot will supplement the URL with a working archive of the URL, as the objective of the bot is to make dead links still readily accessible via archives, as much as possible. —CYBERPOWER (Chat) 08:46, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
@Cyberpower678: If you are afraid of destruction, in that case just comment the item or the bot don't change it.
Your bot change is wrong, but it's not a tragedy. It's a unprofessional change (for the reader). Dušan Kreheľ (talk) 12:17, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
  This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Harej (talk) 14:48, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

About the bots contributionEdit

Hi, I want to report that I notice that one action of the bot in the article "Gioan Baotixita Nguyễn Bá Tòng" at viwiki [6] is not right. The bot switch the archive links to the original link that no longer exist. Is this a problem that could be fixed? ThiênĐế98 (talk) 02:40, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

@ThiênĐế98: Actually this is intended behavior. The original URL needs to be placed in the URL field. The archive URL needs to be placed in the archive URL field. The bot in turn has also set the url-status to "bot: unknown" to hide the original URL from public view. —CYBERPOWER (Chat) 08:43, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Duplicate archive links on nowikiEdit

Please see diff [7] (line 48) for problem with duplicate archive links from problem in July. I also got a new diff from 15. august with the same problem.[8] I'm working on updating the CS1-modules with support for both no:Template:cite web, and no:Template:kilde www, but I'm not quite finished yet. Hopefully this will make it easier to make the bot work as it should? I have redisabled the bot. Tholme (talk) 23:29, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Return to the user page of "InternetArchiveBot".